If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

That woman is not right in the head. There's something mentally wrong with her. She believes she's part of the permanent ruling class that stands above the law and gets what she wants because she's an artistocrat and a democrat.

"Pelosi has used the Air Force equivalent of a Boeing 757 to fly between Washington, D.C., and her San Francisco district. But she has done so exactly once, when no smaller aircraft was available, according to Air Force spokesman Eric Sharman. At other times she flies in a much smaller, 12-seat executive jet, the same type used by her Republican predecessor, Dennis Hastert.

As we pointed out in an Ask FactCheck item on Dec. 12, Hastert was given use of an Air Force C-20B for security reasons following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The speaker of the house is next in line after the vice president for presidential succession.

When Pelosi became speaker, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood (who was appointed by a Republican-led House) proposed using a larger jet that could make the transcontinental flight to her San Francisco district without refueling. This led to claims that Pelosi was demanding use of the Air ForceC-32, normally used by the vice president and first lady. It is fitted out with a fully enclosed stateroom that includes a private lavatory, separate entertainment system and a convertible divan that seats three and folds out to a bed – a "flying Lincoln bedroom," in the words of Republican House Whip Roy Blunt.

But the Pentagon told Pelosi that – while it would make "every effort ... to provide non-stop shuttle support" – it could not guarantee it. As things have worked out, both Pelosi's spokesman and the Air Force say the only time she's flown in the C-32 was when no smaller aircraft was available. She also uses commercial airlines when not traveling on official business, according to her spokesman Brendan Daly."

Personally, I question whether or not the policy implemented by the WH following 9/11 was ever justified. We might all be better off having our elected officials fly regular planes along with the rest of us -- if it's safe enough for me it's safe enough for them. Of course, maybe we're really saying that their presence on a plane endangers the rest of us. After reading through all 72 pages of the DoD documents sent to the self described conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, I don't see anything that stands out very much. The initial discussions of plane sizes were initiated by the Republican appointed Sergeat at Arms and related to identifying which aircraft were capable of flying to San Francisco non-stop. In the later correspondence, similar discussions of size had to do with the need for refueling stops on international trips. Pelosi routinely flies commercial flights for personal business. Personally, I don't care for her mush at all. However, given the WH policy implemented by Bush, her usage of military aircraft does not seem inappropriate.

"Pelosi has used the Air Force equivalent of a Boeing 757 to fly between Washington, D.C., and her San Francisco district. But she has done so exactly once, when no smaller aircraft was available, according to Air Force spokesman Eric Sharman. At other times she flies in a much smaller, 12-seat executive jet, the same type used by her Republican predecessor, Dennis Hastert.

As we pointed out in an Ask FactCheck item on Dec. 12, Hastert was given use of an Air Force C-20B for security reasons following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The speaker of the house is next in line after the vice president for presidential succession.

When Pelosi became speaker, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood (who was appointed by a Republican-led House) proposed using a larger jet that could make the transcontinental flight to her San Francisco district without refueling. This led to claims that Pelosi was demanding use of the Air ForceC-32, normally used by the vice president and first lady. It is fitted out with a fully enclosed stateroom that includes a private lavatory, separate entertainment system and a convertible divan that seats three and folds out to a bed – a "flying Lincoln bedroom," in the words of Republican House Whip Roy Blunt.

But the Pentagon told Pelosi that – while it would make "every effort ... to provide non-stop shuttle support" – it could not guarantee it. As things have worked out, both Pelosi's spokesman and the Air Force say the only time she's flown in the C-32 was when no smaller aircraft was available. She also uses commercial airlines when not traveling on official business, according to her spokesman Brendan Daly."

Personally, I question whether or not the policy implemented by the WH following 9/11 was ever justified. We might all be better off having our elected officials fly regular planes along with the rest of us -- if it's safe enough for me it's safe enough for them. Of course, maybe we're really saying that their presence on a plane endangers the rest of us. After reading through all 72 pages of the DoD documents sent to the self described conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, I don't see anything that stands out very much. The initial discussions of plane sizes were initiated by the Republican appointed Sergeat at Arms and related to identifying which aircraft were capable of flying to San Francisco non-stop. In the later correspondence, similar discussions of size had to do with the need for refueling stops on international trips. Pelosi routinely flies commercial flights for personal business. Personally, I don't care for her mush at all. However, given the WH policy implemented by Bush, her usage of military aircraft does not seem inappropriate.

The policy requiring the Speaker to use military planes for most official travel was implemented under Bush when Hastert was Speaker. All of the usage discussed in the Judicial Watch report happened under that policy while Bush was President. If Pelosi followed that policy, the costs are clearly attributable to a decision made by the Bush administration. If she abused that policy, the fault is hers.

Do I agree with the policy? I'm not sure. I have serious reservations but would have to listen to the security concerns of the CIA and DoD that presumably led to the creation of this policy by Bush. It may have been essential then and it may still be essential now. I'm not sure anyone is to "blame".

Who is to blame for the disgusting sense of entitlement, self-importance and intimidation exhibited by Pelosi's staff? Surely you don't think this is the first time that Pelosi or her staff has acted like that. It's probably the tip of the iceberg.

In one e-mail, aide Kay King complained to the military that they had not made available any aircraft the House speaker wanted for Memorial Day recess.
"It is my understanding there are NO G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable ... The Speaker will want to know where the planes are," King wrote.

In another, when told a certain type of aircraft would not be available, King wrote: "This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset Speaker."

Let's just pray that Pelosi is never in the position to be President of the USA.

I have always looked down on other people saying they would move to another country to get away from having a certain president voted into office here.
But, if this country went crazy enough here to put her in the office of Pres, I would seriously think of moving to my Mum's home country of Australia.
Pelosi is definitely quite a few cards short of a full deck.